Ed Balls bans journalists from his website

File this in the bizarre but true category: take a look at Ed Balls’s website, and in particular his terms and conditions for use of the site:

The User undertakes:
(a) that they will only view the Information for their own private purpose and it [sic] will not publish, reproduce, store or retransmit any of the Information contained in the Web Site

In other words, if you’re – say – a journalist you are not allowed to view his website as part of your job. Hmmm.

P.S. If you do go to his site, I hope you then clear your web browser cache. You wouldn’t want to be caught storing any of the information from his site, would you?

Share:
This entry was posted in Online politics. Bookmark the permalink or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/2529 for twitter and emails. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

13 Comments

  • Posted 13th April 2008 at 3:21 pm | Permalink

    He might want to set up robots.txt so the Internet Archive doesn’t store his webpage then: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.edballs.com/ (teehee).

  • Diversity
    Posted 13th April 2008 at 3:47 pm | Permalink

    I doubt if there is a problem. On a quick look, the nearest to news on the site was: Please vote in your local poll.” “There is no poll today!”

  • Posted 13th April 2008 at 4:26 pm | Permalink

    Don’t think that is what this rather clumsily worded condition means at all. Just means it’s copyright surely.

  • Posted 13th April 2008 at 4:59 pm | Permalink

    I know it’s cruel, but it’s Sunday afternoon and I was bored. It’s all your fault for posting the T&Cs:

    http://tinyurl.com/6mdezn

    And his website does remind me of a sliding tile puzzle…

  • Posted 13th April 2008 at 5:04 pm | Permalink

    It gets better:

    “The User undertakes with Ed Balls that it will treat as confidential the terms of this Agreement”

    That would be the agreement on your official website, would it, Ed?

  • Posted 13th April 2008 at 10:43 pm | Permalink

    Haha, this doesn’t look like the sort of thing he would act on. Unless of course he disliked what someone wrote.

  • Mark
    Posted 14th April 2008 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

    Argh! Awful.

    It basically works and everything, but his creepy eyes are constantly staring at me through the (hard-to-read) flash menus.

    Plus the landing page alone has 48 markup errors –

    I know Prater Raines Lib Dem sites aren’t the prettiest sites, but their w3 standards are high.

    And I bet they charge a helluva lot less than whoever made Balls’ dire site.

  • Stuart
    Posted 14th April 2008 at 6:12 pm | Permalink

    I am very sad to say that it comes as no surprise. This really is a government of horrid political midgets.

  • Richard
    Posted 14th April 2008 at 11:17 pm | Permalink

    As Balls would say – “So What”.

    Sorry, only trying to remind people who this creep is.

  • Helen
    Posted 15th April 2008 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

    That Balls stuff is nothing… you can’t even LOOK at http://www.joanryan.net/ unless you REGISTER! (and you can only register if you are a constituent)

    Oh, and to register you need to provide your name, address, home AND mobile telephone numbers, age group, email, inside leg measurement etc etc

    Interestingly enough, she doesn’t mention how she’s going to use all this information. Surely there should be some sort of data protection bumpf on what rights I’m signing away?

    And what exactly is she trying to hide on this website that you have to “log-in”. Are there other MPs who have this system? Mark P will know….

  • Posted 15th April 2008 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

    Helen,

    Agree on the privacy/dp angle – but that is relatively quick to fix, and perhaps just an oversight like Mr Balls.

    More seriously, “Constituents only” is an interesting idea. I can see that it will increase the quality of service she can provide to them.

    But MPs also work in a “Parliament Representing the Range of Views in the Country” mode working on issues (e.g., Evan Harris on medicine or John Hemming on child protection, and in that mode she needs to be talking to all of us).

    Interesting.

  • Helen
    Posted 16th April 2008 at 10:29 am | Permalink

    Thanks Matt

    I agree, the privacy/dp thing is a quick fix, but a massive, glaring oversight. Clearly she’s had someone who knows what s/he’s doing building the site. Surely they know about data protection if they’ve ever put a form like that on a website.

    Regarding the constituency issue, while I fully understand that she will put her own constituents first, it does seem very secretive. After all, what is this Minister doing in her constituency that she’s so frightened that the rest of us will see? Is she trying to protect herself from things like the Save our Post Office hypocrisy headlines?

  • Posted 16th April 2008 at 10:42 am | Permalink

    I think it depends on whether she has other consultation methods as well.

    I’m trying to find time to ask her for an interview as a response to Our Kingdom’s Networking Democracy debate, but it’s all a struggle at the moment … wp-cache fell over this AM and took me offline, so I’m behind.

    I do love the thought of each MP’s consituents having to vote for their expense allowances, though …. including a graph of net asset value since they entered Parliament.

    Matt

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but will not publish personally abusive comments. Our comments policy is published here, please respect it and all readers of the site.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Do you agree to the T&Cs?